I've been using a dark blue background for years and cringe when I try to use something else. I think #020820 is the exact color, nearly black depending on your gamma, but enough blue to soften it up.
The foreground is a mix of light blues, pale yellows, and white. I use grey50 for comments which I think should drop off to the background when scanning code. I never understood the bright green that is often the default for comments.
Now if I could just figure out how to make fonts other than "Fixed" look good in XEmacs on the Mac. I'm happy enough with it, but sometimes I feel the need for a change and in my setup there are no other good options. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
I'm an emacs user that tried to use eclipse because it has some really nice features, but at the end of the day, I couldn't figure out how to C-x b and type a filename to switch to that file. I set emacs key bindings, so C-a worked as it should (didn't select my whole buffer!), but that's not enough. C-x ( didn't start recording a keyboard macro, M-7 M-0 - didn't create 70 dashes, C-t didn't transpose, etc. I bet there a plugins that do these things, but I don't want to spend hours trawling for modules, which I agree sucks.
That said, if anyone knows of plugins that actually make eclipse like emacs, I'd love some links.
Most browsers store client certificates in a password protected store and require the store password to export the certficate.
Not to suggest that this is completely hacker proof, but the notion that you can simply go to someone's computer and copy their certificates is a little simplistic.
I just started using it the other day with some friends that are using iCal. It's been working great, but I had the same problem initially.
It seems that Sunbird behaves as you suggested if you right click | New Calendar and type in a Location that doesn't exist (eventually it should create it automatically**).
What you should do is right click | New Calendar, no Location. Add at least one event (without one it will publish, but won't refresh a 0B calendar**). Then right click | Publish Entire Calendar (progress bar never seems to do anything for me**). I would then recommend right click | Edit Calendar and check the box for publish changes automatically.
Microsoft, at least, has the decency to wait a few years between upgrades.
I know lame comments like these are essential to journalism and aren't meant to be taken seriously, but I'll bite --
What is indecent about releasing a major upgrade to your operating system after a year? Should Apple sit on these changes for 2 more years?
If you don't want to buy the upgrade, don't. If you want to wait 2 more years, you'll likely get 10.5 with many more changes. You pay a premium to be a geek with the latest gadgets.
When the new iPod was released, I didn't expect Apple to give me a new one just because mine was only 6 months old. I sold mine on eBay and paid a substantial upgrade fee.
Cars are "upgraded" every year and most people don't drive the latest release because it's too expensive for them to upgrade. In fact, sometimes they only involve very minor cosmetic changes! And often they raise the price! Unbelievable!
Oh, but this is software and no physical manufacturing analogies apply.
I'm glad Phish listens to their fans rather than Slashdot on their issue. For technically literate community, I'm suprised there's somuchmisunderstanding. I'll try to make this short and simple.
I don't think Phish wants to host all of their shows in every conceivable bitrate of OGG, WMA, MP3, ACC, etc. And what happens when you bought the OGG version, but you want to play it on your iPod. Do you buy the MP3 version? But your friend convinced you that ACC is better. Now do you buy that one too?
This is a good thing because with non-lossy compression, I am left to choose whatever lossy compression format is right for me.
People want to use different formats.
You choose the format and bitrate you want to use for you.
You use your own computer to put it in that format.
Having saved the original FLACs on a data CD, you later decide to use a different format. No problem.
WAV provides this flexibility. SHN provides this w/ compression. FLAC provides this w/ more compression.
And you'll do this why? Because how many portable and/or home stereo components play FLAC? I'd venture a guess of: none. But many units do play MP3, or WMA (ick, altho WM9 is nice), or recently AAC.
But what happens when they decide to release it in WMA and you can't play that on your portable? Do you then wish they gave it to you in FLAC?
It might be nice to have an uncompressed original copy of the recording that you can then compress however you like. Think about it.
So, yeah I'm glad someone is doing this but I honestly think the market they are speaking to is so small and niche that its going to be lost in the statistical variance of the overall group.
I'm really confused now. I'll try to explain:
FLAC supports the market of individuals that want WAV, ACC, MP3, OGG, or any other compression format (even WMA!) they desire.
WAV supports that same market, without compression. FLAC wins.
ACC supports the ACC market, a subset of the FLAC market. What if I want OGG?
MP3 supports the MP3 market.
OGG supports the OGG market.
WMA supports the (eeiw!) WMA market. Are there people that actually want WMA, or would this decision be forced upon them?
Is it good to have a distribution channel force a compression format and bitrate on you?
Anything that can be represented in digital form can be endlessly replicated, almost for free*, so the only barriers are:
1. Convenience (Tangible)
It gets easier every day, but some are working to make this harder with things like copy protection, but that protection only needs to be circumvented once.
2. Conscience / Patronage / Fear (Psychological)**
I might think that I'm stealing and think that I'm a bad person or I might think that by paying I'm voluntarily supporting art or I might be afraid of breaking a law and getting caught.
The music industry is waging battle on both fronts, but both of them are easily overcome and neither will ever actually render it impossible to make copies of digital content. They're just numbers.
Software, which is also just digital content, has a huge advantage here because for most of us, patronage is important, but on the tangible front, the software company typically provides a service in exchange for my money, like support and upgrades.
What service does the music industry provide to me, the buyer of a particular CD? Although some would, I'm not suggesting that the music industry doesn't provide some service to the music community, like financial support and access to expensive recording equipment, but they're just collecting our money and partonizing art with it, while taking a large chunk in the process.
I'm not sure how this battle will play out, but I'm not part of the music industry and I'm done speculating.
Music is data and data can be copied.
* My computer requires electricity to run and I did pay for my computer. ** I buy music to patronize the bands I like and will continue buying music.
I'm in the market as well and I found this article pretty helpful. To summarize, unless all you do is hack audio/video, it's a waste of money to get a P4-M w/ DDR memory, despite the faster bus, etc. Photoshop and AutoCAD tests were actually faster on the PIII-M.
Both of the above have UXGA (1600x1200) displays. I originally tought I wanted a Powerbook G4, but am not convinced that I can be productive on a 1152x768 display. My development environment looks like this: Left 1/3 of the screen is an Eterm running screen. Right 2/3 is XEmacs. A higher resolution means more code visible at a time and/or a more readable font.
If you don't buy Windows XP...
on
al Qaeda Hacks XP?
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Slashdot Mirror
I've been using a dark blue background for years and cringe when I try to use something else. I think #020820 is the exact color, nearly black depending on your gamma, but enough blue to soften it up.
The foreground is a mix of light blues, pale yellows, and white. I use grey50 for comments which I think should drop off to the background when scanning code. I never understood the bright green that is often the default for comments.
Now if I could just figure out how to make fonts other than "Fixed" look good in XEmacs on the Mac. I'm happy enough with it, but sometimes I feel the need for a change and in my setup there are no other good options. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
I'm an emacs user that tried to use eclipse because it has some really nice features, but at the end of the day, I couldn't figure out how to C-x b and type a filename to switch to that file. I set emacs key bindings, so C-a worked as it should (didn't select my whole buffer!), but that's not enough. C-x ( didn't start recording a keyboard macro, M-7 M-0 - didn't create 70 dashes, C-t didn't transpose, etc. I bet there a plugins that do these things, but I don't want to spend hours trawling for modules, which I agree sucks.
That said, if anyone knows of plugins that actually make eclipse like emacs, I'd love some links.
It's "Rip, Mix, Burn" not "Browse, Rip, Burn, Sync".
Most browsers store client certificates in a password protected store and require the store password to export the certficate.
Not to suggest that this is completely hacker proof, but the notion that you can simply go to someone's computer and copy their certificates is a little simplistic.
I just started using it the other day with some friends that are using iCal. It's been working great, but I had the same problem initially.
It seems that Sunbird behaves as you suggested if you right click | New Calendar and type in a Location that doesn't exist (eventually it should create it automatically**).
What you should do is right click | New Calendar, no Location. Add at least one event (without one it will publish, but won't refresh a 0B calendar**). Then right click | Publish Entire Calendar (progress bar never seems to do anything for me**). I would then recommend right click | Edit Calendar and check the box for publish changes automatically.
** This is a nightly build of an alpha release.
Microsoft, at least, has the decency to wait a few years between upgrades.
I know lame comments like these are essential to journalism and aren't meant to be taken seriously, but I'll bite --
What is indecent about releasing a major upgrade to your operating system after a year?
Should Apple sit on these changes for 2 more years?
If you don't want to buy the upgrade, don't. If you want to wait 2 more years, you'll likely get 10.5 with many more changes. You pay a premium to be a geek with the latest gadgets.
When the new iPod was released, I didn't expect Apple to give me a new one just because mine was only 6 months old. I sold mine on eBay and paid a substantial upgrade fee.
Cars are "upgraded" every year and most people don't drive the latest release because it's too expensive for them to upgrade. In fact, sometimes they only involve very minor cosmetic changes! And often they raise the price! Unbelievable!
Oh, but this is software and no physical manufacturing analogies apply.
I'm glad Phish listens to their fans rather than Slashdot on their issue. For technically literate community, I'm suprised there's so much misunderstanding. I'll try to make this short and simple.
I don't think Phish wants to host all of their shows in every conceivable bitrate of OGG, WMA, MP3, ACC, etc. And what happens when you bought the OGG version, but you want to play it on your iPod. Do you buy the MP3 version? But your friend convinced you that ACC is better. Now do you buy that one too?
This is a good thing because with non-lossy compression, I am left to choose whatever lossy compression format is right for me.
People want to use different formats.
You choose the format and bitrate you want to use for you.
You use your own computer to put it in that format.
Having saved the original FLACs on a data CD, you later decide to use a different format. No problem.
WAV provides this flexibility.
SHN provides this w/ compression.
FLAC provides this w/ more compression.
Consumer choice. Good.
And you'll do this why? Because how many portable and/or home stereo components play FLAC? I'd venture a guess of: none. But many units do play MP3, or WMA (ick, altho WM9 is nice), or recently AAC.
But what happens when they decide to release it in WMA and you can't play that on your portable? Do you then wish they gave it to you in FLAC?
It might be nice to have an uncompressed original copy of the recording that you can then compress however you like. Think about it.
So, yeah I'm glad someone is doing this but I honestly think the market they are speaking to is so small and niche that its going to be lost in the statistical variance of the overall group.
I'm really confused now. I'll try to explain:
FLAC supports the market of individuals that want WAV, ACC, MP3, OGG, or any other compression format (even WMA!) they desire.
WAV supports that same market, without compression. FLAC wins.
ACC supports the ACC market, a subset of the FLAC market. What if I want OGG?
MP3 supports the MP3 market.
OGG supports the OGG market.
WMA supports the (eeiw!) WMA market. Are there people that actually want WMA, or would this decision be forced upon them?
Is it good to have a distribution channel force a compression format and bitrate on you?
On-The-Go playlists
Have a particular set of songs you want to hear? Queue up as many songs as you like in a playlist while away from your computer.
Finally.
There was no word on the clever new dynamic list making technology being employed.
Anything that can be represented in digital form can be endlessly replicated, almost for free*, so the only barriers are:
1. Convenience (Tangible)
It gets easier every day, but some are working to make this harder with things like copy protection, but that protection only needs to be circumvented once.
2. Conscience / Patronage / Fear (Psychological)**
I might think that I'm stealing and think that I'm a bad person or I might think that by paying I'm voluntarily supporting art or I might be afraid of breaking a law and getting caught.
The music industry is waging battle on both fronts, but both of them are easily overcome and neither will ever actually render it impossible to make copies of digital content. They're just numbers.
Software, which is also just digital content, has a huge advantage here because for most of us, patronage is important, but on the tangible front, the software company typically provides a service in exchange for my money, like support and upgrades.
What service does the music industry provide to me, the buyer of a particular CD? Although some would, I'm not suggesting that the music industry doesn't provide some service to the music community, like financial support and access to expensive recording equipment, but they're just collecting our money and partonizing art with it, while taking a large chunk in the process.
I'm not sure how this battle will play out, but I'm not part of the music industry and I'm done speculating.
Music is data and data can be copied.
* My computer requires electricity to run and I did pay for my computer.
** I buy music to patronize the bands I like and will continue buying music.
I'm in the market as well and I found this article pretty helpful. To summarize, unless all you do is hack audio/video, it's a waste of money to get a P4-M w/ DDR memory, despite the faster bus, etc. Photoshop and AutoCAD tests were actually faster on the PIII-M.
I was leaning toward the Toshiba Satellite 5005-S504 until I read this. Running linux is a must, so now I'm considering a Dell Inspiron 8100.
Both of the above have UXGA (1600x1200) displays. I originally tought I wanted a Powerbook G4, but am not convinced that I can be productive on a 1152x768 display. My development environment looks like this: Left 1/3 of the screen is an Eterm running screen. Right 2/3 is XEmacs. A higher resolution means more code visible at a time and/or a more readable font.
then the terrorists have won.